From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753119AbZK0XlZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:41:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752365AbZK0XlZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:41:25 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.159]:47507 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751880AbZK0XlY (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:41:24 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=g6BOzy+VP9I//oqQoQbgYtTrXfBhh1pjcRb5MekrYt+H8pslT69p3V002DJFbazfJY jceilEArdvivOpgunxIuQz9eUitaPQN9xUvQTi1mYn3lmvGRZ1mKXMJMBpIabtIVj4zy rmEFZ8g3/kDDuapdPAwv1oToohP26xrvZcI64= Message-ID: <4B1063A7.2030206@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:41:27 +0100 From: Jiri Slaby User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; cs-CZ; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091122 SUSE/3.0.0-4.1 Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Slaby CC: mingo@elte.hu, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, marcin.slusarz@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, oleg@redhat.com, Stephen Smalley , Eric Paris , David Howells Subject: [PATCH v3 00/27] writable limits References: <1259363167-9347-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <1259363167-9347-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, I broke the threading to not mess up with the long thread. In this version I got rid of the rlim access_only ugliness. There are two things: 1) A prominent example would be the stack limit - we base address layout decisions on it. Check arch/x86/mm/mmap.c. RLIM_INFINITY has a special meaning plus we also set mmap_base() based on the rlim. Should there be some special handling of that? In standard setrlimit there is none. 2) Hmm. you are right. Do you know why acct_file_reopen() does if (old_acct) do_acct_process(); ??? As I expressed myself before, I don't know why it is there (it doesn't make sense to me either). But I took a look at when it was added. From the very first merge of acct.c (2.1.68pre1) it was just in (name == NULL) path (turning acct off). Then in 2.1.126 it was switched to account on every accounting file change. I fear if we changed this, something would break. thanks, -- js